National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR)
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
(NIDDK)
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS)

May 30, 2013 (NOT-OD-13-074) -
NIH to Require Use of Updated Electronic Application Forms for Due Dates on or after September 25, 2013. Forms-C applications are required for due dates on or after September 25, 2013.

June 17, 2013 - See Notice NOT-GM-13-118. Notice of Correction to Eligibility Information and Application Instructions.

The SCORE Program is a developmental program designed to
increase the research competitiveness of faculty at minority-serving
institutions and institutions with a historical mission of training students
from backgrounds underrepresented in biomedical research. These institutions
train a substantial number of professionals who pursue research careers or
provide health care and health related services to populations who are
underserved and not well represented in NIH funded research. SCORE offers three
funding opportunities for individual investigator-initiated research awards
according to their developmental level: Research Advancement Award (SC1),
Pilot Project Award (SC2) and Research Continuance Award (SC3).

The SC2 award allows investigators, in their earlier stages
of development, to test a new idea or gather preliminary data to establish a
new line of research. It is a mentored award and applicants must be able to
commit a minimum of 50 percent of full time-effort during the academic year
and summer to conduct the proposed research. It is expected that
investigators will continue to successfully compete for NIH or other research
support as a result of the progress achieved with an SC2 award.

Key Dates

Posted Date

January 3, 2013

Open Date (Earliest Submission Date)

February 4, 2013

Letter of Intent Due Date(s)

Not Applicable

Application Due Date(s)

March 4, 2013; May 25, 2013 and September 25, 2013, by
5:00 PM local time of applicant organization.

It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in
the SF424
(R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in
this FOA or in a Notice from the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts).
Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the FOA)
is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all
application instructions in the Application Guide as well as any
program-specific instructions noted in Section
IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the
Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions. Applications that
do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.

The mission of the National
Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) is to support research that
increases understanding of life processes and lays the foundation for advances
in disease, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. NIGMS funded researchers seek
to answer important scientific questions in fields such as cell biology,
biophysics, genetics, developmental biology, pharmacology, physiology,
biological chemistry, biomedical technology, bioinformatics, computational
biology, selected aspects of the behavioral sciences and specific cross-cutting
clinical areas that affect multiple organs systems. To assure the vitality and
continued productivity of the research enterprise, NIGMS also provides leadership
in training the next generation of scientists and is particularly interested in
developing and increasing the diversity of the scientific workforce by focusing
on individuals from backgrounds underrepresented in biomedical and behavioral
research. A recent report from an Advisory Committee to the National Institutes
of Health (NIH) Director on Diversity of the Biomedical Research indicates that
achieving diversity in the biomedical research workforce remains an important
problem that must be actively addressed (see http://acd.od.nih.gov/dbr.htm).

The unique historical mission of some institutions of higher
learning has been to educate students from underrepresented backgrounds, and to
provide assistance to the underserved communities that the students come from. For
example, the focus of minority-serving institutions (MSIs) has been the
education and graduation of students from backgrounds underrepresented in
biomedical and behavioral research, including underrepresented racial and
ethnic groups (i.e., African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Native Americans,
and natives of U.S. Pacific Islands). Some other institutions have a mission to
educate students with disabilities, and provide services to the disability
community (J.V. Van Cleve and B. A. Crouch, A Place of their Own: Creating the
Deaf Community in America, GU Press, 1989). As a group, these institutions have
trained science graduates from underrepresented groups who have gone on to
pursue research careers (NSF Women, Minorities and Person with Disabilities Report
2011) and have gained scientific prominence in their research. Some of these
graduates provide health care to underserved populations and are, therefore,
uniquely positioned to engage underserved populations in research and in the
translation of research advances into culturally competent, measurable, and
sustained improvements in health outcomes (Estape et al., Clin. Transl. Sci.
5(10): 112, 2011). NIH support of faculty-initiated research endeavors in these
institutions has promoted increased student exposure to research in biomedical
and behavioral sciences and an enhancement in the number of students from
underrepresented groups who seek advanced degrees and provide much needed
services to these communities.

The Minority Biomedical Research Support (MBRS) Program was
created in 1972 under authority of sec. 301(c) of the PHS Act. It is comprised
of Support of Competitive Research (SCORE) and two other initiatives [Research
Initiative for Scientific Enhancement (RISE) and Initiative for Maximizing Student
Development (IMSD)]. One of the goals of the MBRS Program is to increase the
pool of students from underrepresented backgrounds engaged in biomedical and
behavioral research, and to broaden the opportunities for underrepresented faculty
and students to participate in biomedical and behavioral research.

The goal of the MBRS-SCORE program has evolved over the
years, and the program now seeks to foster the development of faculty at
institutions that have a historical mission focused on serving students from
underrepresented backgrounds (i.e., minority-serving institutions, and/or institutions
with historical missions to serve students with disabilities) in order to
increase their research competitiveness and promote their transition to
non-SCORE external sources of funding. This goal is expected to translate into
an increase the pool of individuals from diverse backgrounds nationally
underrepresented in biomedical and behavioral research available to compete for
NIH funding and professionally engaged in these areas of research. The SCORE
program offers three distinct support mechanisms for individual
investigator-initiated biomedical or behavioral research projects of different
scope and for different program director/principal investigators (PD/PIs) developmental
levels. It is expected that SCORE support will enable faculty at minority
institutions to conduct high-quality research and to increase their research
competitiveness by progressively enhancing the pace and productivity of their
projects. This in turn will provide opportunities for underrepresented students,
especially those that participate in MBRS-RISE programs, to experience research
and will reinforce their motivation to pursue advance degrees.

The SCORE mechanisms available to investigators according to
their experience/track records are:

Research Advancement Award (SC1), which is for investigators
with a track record of research activity who are seeking to enhance their
research productivity in order to transition to non-SCORE support in the near
future. Pilot Project Award (SC2) is for those who are at the beginning stages
of a research career and who are interested in testing a new idea, or
generating preliminary data.

Research Continuance Award (SC3) is for those investigators
who have been engaged in scholarly research and published, and who seek to
continue to conduct competitive research of limited scope increase their
publications and eventually transition to non-SCORE support.

The SC2 mechanism allows investigators, normally in their earlier
stages of development, to test a new idea or gather preliminary data to
establish a new line of research. Applicants must be able to commit a minimum
of 50 percent of full time-effort, i.e., a total of 6 person months (typically
4.5 person-months during the academic year in a 9 month academic appointment
and 1.5 person-months during the summer) to conduct the proposed research. The
institution must provide assurances that the candidate will be able to devote
the required effort developing his/her research project (a letter from the
Chair of the PI's department or Dean is required, see Section IV below).
Mentorship from productive, established scientist(s) in the proposed field of
research is required and the mentor's role must be explained in the application.
The mentor should be recognized as an accomplished investigator in the proposed
research area and have a track record of success in training research
scientists and of independent research support. Additionally, any investigator
applying for the SC2 mechanism must demonstrate that accomplishing the
objectives of the pilot project is a first step in a long-term plan aimed at
becoming established in a given biomedical/behavioral area covered by the NIH
mission and securing other external funding. PIs who successfully complete a
pilot project may apply for an SC1 or SC3 or other (non-SCORE) funding
opportunity depending on their developmental goals. Pilot project support may
be requested for one to three years maximum and is not renewable.

The principal difference between a SC2 pilot project and an
SC1 or SC3 award is that the pilot allows an individual to study and develop a
new idea for which he/she has no preliminary data. Any individual planning to
submit a pilot research project is advised to assess the field of study,
evaluate his/her credentials and expertise, determine the resources necessary
to conduct the project, and work on a clear hypothesis before initiating the
writing of a proposal. He/she is also encouraged to consult the instructions in
forms SF424 (R&R) and PHS 398, which provide general guidance on how to
prepare an NIH investigator-initiated application.

Apart from having a mentor, SC2 PD/PIs are encouraged to
establish meaningful collaborations with R01-funded investigators in the U.S.,
particularly outside of the applicant's institution, that will increase the
progress and productivity of the project. These collaborators or consultants
must be recognized experts in a field and must have their own research support,
i.e., SC2 funds may not be used to fund a consultant's or collaborator's
research project. Collaborators, who may be from the applicant institution or
another institution, generally provide expertise in a specific aspect of the
proposed project in which the PD/PI has little or no experience. Collaborators
from other institutions cannot receive any support from an SCORE award.
Consultants from institutions other than the applicant institution are
individuals who have committed to contributing intellectually to the scientific
project development or execution but are not committing any specified
measurable effort (in person months) to the project. The specific aspect of the
project that requires the expertise of a consultant or collaborator must be
clearly described in the application as well as the role of the
consultants/collaborators in the PIs research development (see special
instructions below). Applications must clearly define and describe the distinct
role that mentors, collaborators, and consultants will have in the development
of both the proposed research project and the investigator. Since SC2 is a
developmental award multiple PD/PIs, co-PIs or co-Investigators are not
allowed.

SCORE investigator-initiated research projects are limited
to the NIH mission. SCORE PD/PIs are strongly encouraged to use the Research
Portfolio Online Reporting Tools (RePORT) at http://report.nih.gov/index.aspx,
to search for all past and currently funded NIH grants and their descriptions.
Upon receipt, SC2 grant applications are assigned to NIGMS for initial review.
In the event of an award, the programmatic management of the SC2 will be
transferred to NIGMS or another participating NIH Institute or Center (IC)
based on the scientific content of the award and according to established NIH
referral guidelines.

Each participating IC maintains a Web site with funding
opportunities and areas of interest. Contact with an IC representative may help
focus the research plan based on an understanding of the mission of the IC. For
specific information about the mission of each NIH IC, see http://www.nih.gov/icd, which provides a
brief summary of the research interests in each IC and access to individual IC
home pages. Applicants are strongly advised to review the SCORE Answers
to Frequently Asked Questions section in the NIGMS website, http://www.nigms.nih.gov/Training/MBRS/SCOREUpdateFAQ.htm before they consider applying for any SCORE individual award. Submitted
applications that are found not to fall within the NIH mission will be
withdrawn prior to review.

Section II. Award Information

Funding Instrument

Grant: A support mechanism providing money, property, or
both to an eligible entity to carry out an approved project or activity.

Application Types Allowed

New
Renewal
Resubmission

The OER
Glossary and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide provide details on
these application types.

Funds Available and Anticipated Number of Awards

The number of awards is contingent upon NIH appropriations
and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.

Award Budget

Application budgets may not exceed $100,000 direct costs/year
for a maximum of three years and must reflect actual needs of the proposed
project.

Award Project Period

The scope of the proposed project should determine the
project period. The maximum period of support is 3 years.

NIH grants policies as
described in the NIH Grants
Policy Statement will apply to the
applications submitted and awards made in response to this FOA.

Section III. Eligibility
Information

1. Eligible Applicants

Eligible Organizations

This funding opportunity announcement is open to all
institutions of higher learning with a historical mission of educating students
from diverse backgrounds underrepresented in biomedical and behavioral research
as defined by the National Science Foundation (NSF, see http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/)
(i.e., African Americans, Hispanic Americans, American Indians, Alaska Natives,
Native Hawaiians, U.S. Pacific Islanders, and persons with disabilities).
Applicant institutions must be located in the United States of America or its
territories including Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, the Canal Zone, Guam,
America Samoa, or the successor States of the Trust Territory of the Pacific
Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall
Islands, and the Republic of Palau. In addition, these institutions must:

Applicant organizations must complete the following registrations
as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply
for or receive an award. Applicants must have a valid Dun and Bradstreet
Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number in order to begin each of the following
registrations.

System for
Award Management (SAM)– must maintain an active entity registration
(formerly CCR registration), to be renewed at least annually. Use the Sam.gov
“Manage Entity” function to manage your entity registrations. See the Grants
Registration User Guide at SAM.gov for additional information.

All Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))
must also work with their institutional officials to register with the eRA
Commons or ensure their existing eRA Commons account is affiliated with the eRA
Commons account of the applicant organization.

All registrations must be completed by the application due date. Applicant
organizations are strongly encouraged to start the registration process at
least 6 weeks prior to the application due date.

Eligible Individuals (Program Director/Principal
Investigator)

Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources
necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal
Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) is invited to work with his/her organization to
develop an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial
and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always
encouraged to apply for NIH support.

An SC1 PD/PI must also have a full-time regular faculty
appointment at the applicant institution and be eligible to apply for a NIH R01
research grant. Postdoctoral fellows, research instructors, research assistant
professors, research scientists, other research appointments or appointments
contingent on an individual securing his/her salary from grants, and part-time
or adjunct faculty are not eligible to apply for SCORE individual awards.
Emeritus/retired investigators/professors as well as individuals with a track
record of R01 or equivalent research grant awards are considered to be fully
developed and may not apply for this award. Investigators who have
developmental award support are ineligible to apply for SCORE individual
awards, i.e., SCORE awards are not intended to duplicate other individual or
institutional developmental awards; these include K awards and awards given as
part of institutional centers or program projects. An applicant may not be the
PI of any other SCORE or any other investigator initiated research grant at the
time an SC2 award is made. Concurrent or duplicate application to any of the
SCORE mechanisms (SC1, SC2, or SC3) by a single PD/PI is not allowed. A PD/PI
may only apply for/receive one SC award at a time.

PD/PIs who have received one cycle of R01 or R21 support
during their professorial career may apply for an SC1 award but would receive
support for only SC1 grant cycle, i.e., no renewal is allowed. Current PD/PIs
of R01, R21, or of other equivalent investigator initiated research awards are
ineligible to apply for any of the SCORE mechanisms. Multiple PD/PI
applications are not allowed. SC2 awards may not be transferred from one PD/PI
to another. If an SC2 PD/PI moves to another SCORE eligible institution,
his/her award may be transferred to the new institution provided that all
transfer requirements as per NIH and SCORE policy are fulfilled.

Applicant organizations may submit more than one application,
provided that each application is scientifically distinct.

NIH will not accept any application that is essentially the
same as one already reviewed within the past thirty-seven months (as described
in the NIH
Grants Policy Statement), except for submission:

To an RFA of an application that was submitted previously as an
investigator-initiated application but not paid;

Of an investigator-initiated application that was originally submitted
to an RFA but not paid; or

Of an application with a changed grant activity code.

Institutions may submit individual SC1, SC2
or SC3 applications to a combined maximum of 20 total of applications and
awards at any time. The maximum number of individual SCORE awards (combination
of SC1, SC2, SC3) that a single institution may hold is 20.

Section IV. Application and Submission Information

1. Requesting an
Application Package

Applicants must download the SF424 (R&R) application
package associated with this funding opportunity using the “Apply for Grant
Electronically” button in this FOA or following the directions provided at Grants.gov.

2. Content and Form of Application Submission

It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in
the SF424
(R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed in this funding
opportunity announcement to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in
the Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are
out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for
review.

The forms package associated with this FOA includes all
applicable components, mandatory and optional. Please note that some
components marked optional in the application package are required for
submission of applications for this FOA. Follow all instructions in the SF424
(R&R) Application Guide to ensure you complete all appropriate “optional”
components.

Page Limitations

All page limitations described in the SF424 Application
Guide and the Table of
Page Limits must be followed.

Budget Component

List all costs for collaborators and consultants.
Collaborators from the applicant institution may be paid for the limited time,
not to exceed a total of 2 person months, devoted to a specific area of the project.
Consultants may be paid a reasonable honorarium commensurate with their limited
involvement in a project.

Other Project Information Component

Other Attachments

Prepare a single attachment titled
"institutional information" and upload it via the Other Attachments
section. The attachment should include:

1) Background information and evidence of the
institution's historical mission to educate students from backgrounds
nationally underrepresented in biomedical and behavioral research, and efforts
to provide services to the underserved community.

a. Demographics of student body in the sciences,
i.e., total and undergraduate (BS/BA) and graduate (MS/PhD) science student enrollment
and graduation numbers and percentages of the different groups nationally underrepresented
in biomedical and behavioral research.

b. Number of underrepresented students graduating
from the applicant institution who have go on and completed the Ph.D. in
biomedical and behavioral in the past ten years (this information may be
retrieved from NSF WebCaspar at https://webcaspar.nsf.gov/).

4) An institutional letter certifying that the time
and effort requested by the PI will be provided. This letter must explain also
the institution's commitment to the PD/PI's proposed research development.

SF424(R&R) Senior/Key Person Profile Expanded
Component

In the PD/PI's biographical sketch his/her developmental
objectives and plan should be included under a separate subheading of his/her Personal
Statement. These objectives and plan must present how the PD/PI's SC2 and
research career goals will be achieved as a logical progression from the
candidate's past training and experience and how SC2 support will allow the PD/PI
to transition to other external support. The plan must justify the PD/PI's need
for development via the SC2 mechanism and provide an explanation of how the
proposed project, the time devoted to it (50% effort or 6 person months), and
the participation of the mentor(s), collaborators/consultants will help the PD/PI
further his/her research competitiveness and significantly improve his/her
productivity to allow him/her to compete for other external support. The
developmental plan must also provide a timeline for publications and the
transition to other external support. Additionally, a PD/PI must provide
information on past/current student involvement from underrepresented groups (especially
RISE students, if applicable) in their research projects.

A Biographical Sketch for each mentor is required as part of
key personnel and it should include a description of the role of the mentor and
mentoring plan within the page limits of the mentor’s personal statement. This
should provide: (1) information on his/her research qualifications and previous
experience as a research supervisor/mentor; (2) a mentoring plan that describes
the nature of the supervision and mentoring that will occur during the proposed
award period; and (3) a plan for monitoring the applicant’s research,
publications, and transition to the next step in his/her research career.
Please note that a letter from the mentor(s) is no longer required.

Include an entry for each collaborator and consultant. Collaborators,
who may be from the applicant institution or another institution, generally
provide expertise in a very specific aspect of the execution of the proposed
project in which the PD/PI has little or no experience. Consultants from
institutions other than the applicant institution are individuals who have
committed to contributing intellectually to the scientific project development
or execution but are not committing any specified measurable effort (in person
months) to the project or conducting any part of the project. The role of a
consultant/collaborator in a project must be described clearly and fully
justified in personal statement of their biosketch.

PHS 398 Research Plan Component

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide
must be followed, with the following additional instructions:

Research Strategy

PD/PIs who have received previous S06 or SC support
must include a progress report as part of the research strategy even if the
proposed project is scientifically different or they have had a gap in funding.

Resource Sharing Plan

Individuals are required to comply with the
instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans (Data Sharing Plan, Sharing Model
Organisms, and Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS)) as provided in the SF424
(R&R) Application Guide.

Appendix

Do not use the Appendix to circumvent page limits. Follow
all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R)
Application Guide.

3. Submission Dates and
Times

Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications
before the deadline to ensure they have time to make any application
corrections that might be necessary for successful submission.

Organizations must submit applications via Grants.gov, the online portal to find and apply for grants
across all Federal agencies. Applicants must then complete the submission
process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH’s electronic system for grants
administration.

Applicants
are responsible for viewing their application before the deadline in the eRA
Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.

Information on the submission process and a definition of
on-time submission are provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

SCORE SC2 awards include some restrictions as to how the
funds may be used. The following account summarizes some of the allowable and
non-allowable costs under the SCORE SC2 mechanism.

Allowable
Costs

Costs essential to the conduct of the research projects, such as
salaries of technicians or postdoctoral fellows, equipment, travel, and supplies
are allowed.

Faculty salaries, typically based on full-time, nine-month
contractual appointment with the applicant organization, and reimbursed
according to person months dedicated to the proposed research. Summer salary
support based on person months spent on the SCORE research project is allowable
if permitted by institutional policy. The maximum summer-salary support
provided by the program may not exceed the equivalent of two months or another
length of time specified by the institution as its policy, whichever is
shorter.

Travel costs for external consultants/collaborators or PD/PI's
travel to collaborator's institution are permitted.

Consultants may be paid a reasonable honorarium commensurate with
their defined role on the project.

Unallowable
Costs

Salary for postdoctoral fellows or equivalent positions is not
allowed.

Student stipends, salaries, or tuition are not allowed.

Textbooks, journals, memberships, and Internet or cell phone
subscription costs are not allowed.

Employees of the applicant institution may not serve as paid
consultants.

Support for foreign institutions, foreign research services, foreign
components/consortia, or foreign collaborators is not allowed. Collaborators/consultants
are expected to have their own research funds, i.e., SCORE grant funds may not
be utilized to provide collaborators/consultants support for the conduct of
research projects such as salary for technical personnel or to purchase
equipment or supplies.

Travel for technical personnel is not allowed.

Funds for faculty salaries cannot be used to supplement the PD/PI's
actual academic year salary or to increase the base by which academic year PD/PI
salaries are calculated. Salary or other compensation for collaborators is not
allowed.

Salary compensation for mentors, salary or other compensation for
collaborators, or secretarial/clerical support is not allowed.

6. Other Submission
Requirements and Information

Applications must be submitted electronically following the
instructions described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.

For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission
process, visit Applying
Electronically.

Important
reminders:All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the
Credential fieldof the Senior/Key Person Profile Component of the
SF424(R&R) Application Package. Failure to register in the Commons
and to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent
the successful submission of an electronic application to NIH.

The applicant organization must ensure that the DUNS number it provides on the
application is the same number used in the organization’s profile in the eRA
Commons and for the System for Award Management (SAM). Additional information
may be found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for
completeness by the Center for Scientific Review, NIH. Applications that are
incomplete will not be reviewed.

Post Submission Materials

Applicants are required to follow the instructions for
post-submission materials, as described in NOT-OD-10-115.

Section V. Application Review Information

1.
Criteria

Only the review criteria described below will be considered
in the review process. As part of the NIH mission,
all applications submitted to the NIH in support of biomedical and behavioral
research are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer
review system.

Overall Impact

Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect
their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained,
powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the
following review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the
project proposed).

Scored Review Criteria

Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in
the determination of scientific merit, and give a separate score for each. An
application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to
have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not
innovative may be essential to advance a field.

Significance

Does the project address an important problem or a
critical barrier to progress in the field? If the aims of the project are
achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical
practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the
concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative
interventions that drive this field? How will successful completion of the
project aims and PD/PI's developmental goals facilitate the PD/PI's transition
to non-SCORE support?

Investigator(s)

Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other
researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or New
Investigators, or in the early stages of independent careers, do they have
appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an
ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the
project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have
complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach,
governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project? Do the
investigator's credentials and experience engender confidence that he/she is
well poised to succeed in establishing the research line proposed and securing
subsequent funding? Do the mentor's credentials and role on the project provide
convincing evidence that the mentoring relationship will foster the applicant's
research and professional development? Are the PD/PI's developmental objectives
reasonable and what is the likelihood that they will be accomplished and that
he/she will increase his/her research competitiveness?

Innovation

Does the application challenge and seek to shift
current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical
concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are
the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions
novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement,
improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or
methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?

Approach

Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses
well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project?
Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success
presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the
strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be
managed?

If the project involves clinical research, are the plans for 1) protection of
human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion of minorities and members
of both sexes/genders, as well as the inclusion of children, justified in terms
of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?

Environment

Will the scientific environment in which the work
will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional
support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators
adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique
features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative
arrangements? How committed is the institution to the PD/PI's research
development during and beyond SCORE support? To what extent does the
institution's historical mission and background information render confidence that
there is a pool of students from diverse backgrounds underrepresented in
biomedical and behavioral areas of research who may benefit from participation
in SCORE-supported research?

Additional Review Criteria

As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will
evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and
technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, but will not give
separate scores for these items.

Protections for Human Subjects

For research that involves human subjects but does
not involve one of the six categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR
Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human
subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their
participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to
subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the
subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data
and safety monitoring for clinical trials.

For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or
more of the six categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46,
the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human
subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For
additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to
the Human
Subjects Protection and Inclusion Guidelines.

Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and
Children

When the proposed project involves clinical research,
the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for inclusion of minorities and
members of both genders, as well as the inclusion of children. For additional
information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Human
Subjects Protection and Inclusion Guidelines.

Vertebrate Animals

The committee will evaluate the involvement of live
vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the
following five points: 1) proposed use of the animals, and species, strains,
ages, sex, and numbers to be used; 2) justifications for the use of animals and
for the appropriateness of the species and numbers proposed; 3) adequacy of
veterinary care; 4) procedures for limiting discomfort, distress, pain and
injury to that which is unavoidable in the conduct of scientifically sound
research including the use of analgesic, anesthetic, and tranquilizing drugs
and/or comfortable restraining devices; and 5) methods of euthanasia and reason
for selection if not consistent with the AVMA Guidelines on Euthanasia. For
additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please
refer to the Worksheet
for Review of the Vertebrate Animal Section.

Biohazards

Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures
proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the
environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.

Resubmissions

For Resubmissions, the committee will evaluate the
application as now presented, taking into consideration the responses to
comments from the previous scientific review group and changes made to the
project.

Renewals

For Renewals, the committee will consider the
progress made in the last funding period.

Revisions

Not Applicable

Additional Review Considerations

As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will
consider each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items,
and should not consider them in providing an overall impact score.

Applications from Foreign
Organizations

Not Applicable

Select Agent Research

Reviewers will assess the information provided in
this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in
the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select
Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor
possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate
biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).

Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the
requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to
the proposed research.

2. Review and Selection
Process

Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical
merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s), in accordance with NIH peer
review policy and procedures, using the stated review
criteria. Assignment to a Scientific Review Group will be shown in the eRA
Commons.

As part of the scientific peer review, all applications:

May undergo a selection process in which only those applications
deemed to have the highest scientific and technical merit (generally the top
half of applications under review) will be discussed and assigned an overall impact
score.

Will receive a written critique.

Applications will be assigned on the basis of established
PHS referral guidelines to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications
will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications . Following
initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of
review by the NIGMS Advisory Council. The following will be considered in
making funding decisions:

Scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as
determined by scientific peer review.

Availability of funds.

Relevance of the proposed project to program priorities.

Potential contribution to achieve the MBRS goal of increasing the
number of individuals from underrepresented groups who participate in biomedical
and behavioral research.

3. Anticipated Announcement
and Award Dates

After the peer review of the application is completed, the
PD/PI will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written critique) via
the eRA
Commons.

If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH
will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as
described in the NIH Grants
Policy Statement.

A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided
to the applicant organization for successful applications. The NoA signed by
the grants management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent via
email to the grantee’s business official.

Awardees must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.5. Funding Restrictions. Selection
of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any
costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk. These
costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs.

When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required
to submit the annual Non-Competing Progress Report (PHS 2590 or RPPR)
and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants
Policy Statement.

A final progress report, invention
statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are
required for closeout of an award, as described in the NIH Grants
Policy Statement.

The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of
2006 (Transparency Act), includes a requirement for awardees of Federal grants
to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation
under Federal assistance awards issued in FY2011 or later. All awardees of
applicable NIH grants and cooperative agreements are required to report to
the Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) available at www.fsrs.gov on all subawards over $25,000. See the NIH Grants
Policy Statement for additional information on this reporting
requirement.

4. Evaluation

In carrying out its stewardship of research development
awards, the NIH may request information essential to an assessment of the
effectiveness of this program from databases and from participants themselves.
Participants may be contacted after the completion of their SC2 awards for
information other than that available in databases that could be helpful in
evaluating the impact of the program in their research career.

After ten years of making awards under this program, NIH
will assess the program’s overall outcomes, gauge its effectiveness in
developing the PIs research competitiveness and in transitioning to non-SCORE
support. Upon completion of this evaluation NIH will determine the program’s
continuing need and whether to (a) continue the program as currently
configured, (b) continue the program with modifications, or (c) discontinue the
program.

Listed below are key metrics to be used to help determine
whether the program goals or outcomes have been met in a future evaluation:

1) Number of PIs who have successfully transitioned
to non-SCORE support.

2) Types of NIH awards secured by the PIs who
successfully transition to non-SCORE support.

3) Number of scientific publications resulting from
SCORE support.

4) Number of students from underrepresented groups engaged
in research conducted by SCORE PD/PIs.

Section VII. Agency Contacts

We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity
and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.

Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and
405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under
Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92.